Andrew Robson is accused of murdering Paul Bowles
Paul Bowles(Image: Greater Manchester Police)
A driver accused of murder after an alleged ‘road rage’ row ‘lost his temper’, jurors were told – while his defence has claimed the incident was a ‘classic accident’.
Andrew Robson denies murdering 50-year-old Paul Bowles after the pair became involved in an argument at a roundabout. Minshull Street Crown Court heard they became involved in a verbal altercation after a van driven by Mr Robson was said to have come ‘very close’ to Mr Bowles’ car.
They stopped at a set of traffic lights on the Elk Mill roundabout in Royton and became involved in a fight. Prosecutors allege Mr Robson, 33, who runs a fencing company, got back into his van and deliberately struck Mr Bowles. Mr Robson has said that he was ‘scared to death’ and ‘just wanted to get away’.
Sign up to the MEN Court newsletter here
Mr Robson said he hadn’t deliberately driven his van at Mr Bowles, and that he didn’t know he had hit him. On Thursday (September 25), jurors listened to closing speeches delivered by barristers in the case.
Prosecuting, Gordon Cole KC told them to use their ‘common sense’. He said the van and a dashcam ‘disappeared’ after the incident, on the evening of Wednesday, March 26.
“Common sense is one of the most important features that, we say, you bring to your assessment of a case,” he added. “There can be only one common sense reason as to why something that the defendant says will 100 per cent support his case has disappeared.
“The clear inference behind the disappearance of the van and the dashcam is simple and clear. It does not help Andrew Robson one jot. It would show what he saw, it would show what he did.”
Mr Cole added: “Something caused these two men to want to have a fight with each other on a main road, in the middle of the roundabout.
Police at the scene in Oldham(Image: Sean Hansford | Manchester Evening News)
“We say that supports a clear scenario here of people getting involved in an argument, often called road rage, making gestures to each other, getting so het up and so angry that these two grown men get out of their vehicle and have a fight.
“We say it caused one of the two grown men to get so angry that he ended up taking the life of somebody else.” Mr Cole said Mr Bowles’ daughter had ‘not sought to hide’ that her father had been ‘aggressive’ and that ‘he was ready to have a fight’.
Speaking of the defendant, Mr Cole claimed: “He caused the death because he lost his temper. He caused the death because he wanted to teach somebody a lesson, and got taught a lesson. He was angry, we say, and deliberately drove at Mr Bowles.”
Jurors heard a speech from Mr Robson’s barrister Simon Csoka KC. He reminded the jury of the evidence of the prosecution’s road collision expert, who said tyre marks at the scene were consistent with ‘torque steer’.
He said such an unintentional pull to the side due to too much acceleration was ‘classic accident’ involving someone driving in ‘suboptimal conditions’.
Mr Csoka said he was not asking the jury to decide ‘exactly what sparked this all off’. He said: “Does it really matter whether it was something Mr Robson did… whether there was a rude gesture, whether someone cut someone up?”
He said it was ‘nothing compared to what happened next’ when he told jurors that Mr Robson was held in a bear hug and repeatedly punched by a ‘big, heavy man’. Mr Csoka said: “When someone is stressed they drive worse.
“When someone is distracted they drive worse. When someone is in fear they drive worse. If they have just been repeatedly punched to the head, they drive worse. You are not here to consider driving offences. You are only here in this trial to consider the charges on the indictment.
“It is for the prosecution to prove this case. The defendant does not have to prove anything at all.
“It is not for me to make you sure of some alternative to what the prosecution say. What’s for me to do is demonstrate that putting together the different strands of the evidence together the way the prosecution has done has been extremely selective, and ignores part of it such as torque steer – classic accident.
Join our Court and Crime WhatsApp group HERE
“You need to consider all the evidence, especially the objective evidence such as that of an expert. What we say is all of it points towards accident, or at the very least leaves open the possibility of accident.
“And if you think there is a possibility this was an accident then you would acquit the defendant on the counts of murder and manslaughter.”
Mr Robson, of Fold Green, Chadderton, Oldham, denies murder and an alternative count of manslaughter.
Proceeding